Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

The Great Unmasking

Ooooops.

Thanks to the election of President Trump, we are in the midst of a process I call “the great unmasking.” American leftists and progressives have, until President Trump, gone out of their way to hide their disdain for this country and its (mostly) free-market economy. They are enraged that everything is not perfect by their lights and imagine that they could produce a much better system if only they had absolute power.  

Because the deplorables out there in the American public still cling to patriotism (ever since Karl Marx, the left has disdained nationalism as obstructing worldwide proletarian class solidarity), progressive politicians have hidden their disdain.

But Donald Trump’s election has engendered a mass neurosis we call “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” which has engendered a frenzy to be rid of him. Frenzied is never a good mode of action, for it blinds one to obvious pitfalls.

That’s why yesterday, the governor of New York, speaking to a friendly group, let slip a genuine gaffe, in the meaning of Michael Kinsley’s definition: accidentally telling the truth. Nobody could ever state in public that America “was never that great” unless he believed that. That’s why the expression has a ring of sincerity when Cuomo uttered those words.

He’s a Leftard and a Democrat-Socialist (BIRM), so the only surprising thing is that he was stupid and politically maladroit enough to slip up and express his true beliefs right out loud. And even that ain’t much of a surprise, given how completely Out about such things so many of them are since we smacked ’em right in their filthy gobs with President Donald J Trump.

They hate America. They hate the white guys who founded it. They hate the white guys who held it together and made it work all along. They hate the very idea that anybody might believe it’s great (or ever was). They hate the fact that we’re no longer willing to sit meekly back and tolerate their abuse. Most of all, they hate the deeply-buried, subconscious knowledge that they’re a bunch of pussified parasites whose very existence as peurile, neurotic, self-loathing, eternally-complaining, shit-stirring brats would be measurable in minutes in the Marxist shitholes they so admire.

Nemo provides a few worthy ripostes over in Bill’s comment section. As for Koo-mo, naturally he got busy backpedaling and non-apology apologizing, for all the good it’ll do him anywhere outside NYC—where they won’t see what all the fuss was about anyway.

Share

MORE collusion!

You just gotta love these gormless, hapless clowns. For certain values of “love,” natch.

A coordinated campaign by more than 100 newspapers Thursday will see publication of a wide variety of editorials, all condemning President Trump for his attacks on the press and pretty much anything and everything. (Update: Reported number now over 300.)

This is what fellow recovering journalist Kerry Dougherty so astutely calls “briar-patch-level genius.”

Here we have a president attacking the mainstream media as lying “enemies of the people” and “fake news” trying to bring him down. And over there we have a significant chunk of the mainstream media publishing a nationwide coordinated campaign of collusion to bring him down.

Trump was not elected despite his often outrageous behavior and statements. He was elected because of his outrageous behavior and statements.

They promised drastic change and profound offense to so many establishment types, especially in the East and the media, who in their self-satisfied position of power and comfort had for so long patronized and ignored the complaints and pleas of that plurality.

Had those elites of both parties paid genuine attention to flyover country’s concerns, frustrations and fears, as silly and stupid as they seem to disconnected Beltway know-it-all’s, they would not be in today’s baffling, powerless position. There would have been no need for a Trump. And by the way, isn’t it strange how a billionaire from a New York high-rise could detect the heartland’s hurt better than those elected from that region?

Actually, it isn’t strange in the least; since they are the authors of that hurt, and the perpetuators of it, it’s no more than obvious and inevitable. It’s not so much that they can’t detect it as that they hope like hell we can’t detect their disinterest in it, and most especially their role as creators of it.

Trump did not invent many Americans’ visceral dislike of the media. He’s using it, exactly as these 100+ newspapers will use their readers’ visceral dislike of Trump to influence a large audience on this day. It’s all fair game in a free society, even one as bitterly splintered as ours these days.

Many silent Americans see a Washington paper, for example, chronicling in excess of 4,000 Trump exaggerations and lies. Fair enough.

Where was that passion for lie detection during Obama’s endless reign of error when he spewed serial untruths about, among others, Solyndra, Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, Benghazi’s video roots and how Americans could keep their insurance, doctor and about $2,500 in savings under Obamacare?

Oh, we all know well enough where that “passion for lie detection” was—which is a YUGE part of their problem now. Limbaugh knows it too:

Now, let’s go to this media-coordinated effort started by some editorial writer at the Boston Globe to have America’s major newspapers unite and run anti-Trump editorials today while maintaining that they are not united in opposition to Trump! While trying to maintain that they are not the enemy of the people — which, by the way, Trump has never said. He said fake news is the enemy of the people.  He never said the media in toto or the media at large. My point is they’re proving everything Trump’s alleged about ’em with this little scheme that they’re trying.

But here’s the thing about this: They’re not gonna persuade anyone. This is gonna backfire on them because you know what it’s proving?  It’s proving something very simple. It’s proving the media is biased — and of course, they maintain that they aren’t. But you can’t get a more classic definition and illustration of media bias than this.

Trump has always said the fake news is the enemy of the people, but not all the news, not the entire news media. But for some reason all these news people think that he is talking about them. Now, from a couple of days ago Little Brian Stelter at CNN: “More than 100 Newspapers Will Publish Editorials Decrying Trump’s Anti-Press Rhetoric — [Marjorie] Pritchard said. ‘We have some big newspapers, but the majority are from smaller markets, all enthusiastic about standing up to Trump’s assault on journalism.”

I can’t tell you what a majority of the American people — how big a majority — agree with Trump on this. I cannot tell you how many Americans are fed up with the media, with the unfairness, with the bias. You know it as well as I do. Maybe even better. Trump is more accessible than any president has ever been.  Trump talks to the media more often than any president ever has. Trump lets them into cabinet meetings. He lets them into little meetings that go on in the Oval Office when foreign leaders are in town.

He sometimes conducts entire meetings at the White House with the media present. He stops on the way to Marine One — the helicopter or wherever. He stops, and he’ll talk to the press for 15 or 20 minutes. He just happens to call ’em out on their BS! Trump has not spied on them the way Obama did.

All of which adds up to make their fearful caterwauling and indignant protestations over Trump’s bluntly accurate characterization of them all the more amusing. Back to Malcolm for the closer, whose own contempt for Trump is apparently uncontainable:

As part of their drift off into monopoly arrogance, newspapers in general and editorial pages in particular somehow came to think and lecture like they knew better than the readers who paid good money to read their words. They were pharmacists handing out a daily dose of the news they prescribed. Not a good attitude for any business to have toward customers, especially in an era of expanding free choices.

And now these same editors and publications will again lecture the country about the dangers and evils of the man they didn’t like 646 days ago, who punches back and got elected by millions who didn’t read those lectures then either. Other media, righteously nodding their heads, will cover it conscientiously and copiously as if it’s important medicine and of no self-interest.

By Friday, those pages will be in the bottom of recycle bins and bird cages. And in their cozy, mutual isolations, millions on both sides will feel sure once more that they’re in the right.

Ahh, but there’s the rub, see: one side IS in the right. And it ain’t the side trying to bring down a duly-elected President with lies and skullduggery, however one Andrew Malcolm (or anybody else) may feel about the guy.

Share

AT LAST: Russia-collusion/election-rigging smoking gun FOUND!

And it’s pointed directly at the head of the Grand Wizard of the Coup Cucks Clan himself.

In his online appeal for money after being fired this week, disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok credited an unlikely source to vouch for his victim status: The Weekly Standard.

At one time a leading conservative magazine, the Standard declared last month that Strzok’s plight was merely an “overwrought tale of bias” and the case against him is “just sound and fury.” The article brushed off Strzok’s actions as “several bad judgment calls” and blasted Congressional Republicans for continuing a criminal investigation into the now-unemployed G-man.

Strzok is following only 32 people on his newly-verified Twitter account. Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of the Standard, is one of them.

So, what’s with the fanboying between the Standard—an allegedly serious publication dedicated to advancing conservative principles—and a corrupt government bureaucrat who embodies everything the conservative movement fought against for decades?

Julie Kelly has done some excellent journalistic work here—REAL journalism, not the kind we’re all too accustomed to. I’ll quote from it extensively here, because…because…well, because I just can’t help myself, dammit.

I found an article in the Standards archives this week that might explain why. On July 24, 2016, just days before Strzok helped launch a counterintelligence probe into the Trump campaign, Kristol gave Strzok and the Obama Justice Department a big assist from the anti-Trump Right by posting a flawed and questionably-sourced article. “Putin’s Party” is compelling evidence that Kristol and the Standard were far from mere sideline observers as the Trump-Russia collusion scam took shape in the summer of 2016.

At the very least, the timing of the article suggests there was careful coordination between the central players—including the Hillary Clinton campaign—and Bill Kristol to derail Trump’s candidacy just weeks before the election. But the article’s content also serves to raise alarming questions about the claims by many Republicans that “conservatives” had no knowledge of or involvement with the Christopher Steele dossier.

Kristol’s article hits on every single one of the Simpson-Steele talking points: Trump forced the GOP to water-down language on the Ukraine in the party’s platform (it didn’t happen); the Russians were behind Wikileaks’ release of the DNC’s hacked emails (unproven); Trump encouraged foreign powers to interfere in the election (he didn’t); and Trump would not honor U.S. commitments to NATO (an overblown assessment of Trump’s NATO criticism nearly all the Republican candidates made). He listed a handful of unknown Trump campaign associates who would soon become household names, including campaign manager Paul Manafort; national security advisor, Lt. General Michael Flynn; and foreign policy aide Carter Page. (Strzok and the FBI formally opened their investigation into the three men—and campaign aide George Papadopoulos—on July 31, 2016.)

The content of Kristol’s piece closely mirrored reporting by other news outlets at the same time. (Lee Smith wrote about how the Fusion-planted media echo chamber evolved before the election.) But despite the flimsiness of the accusations, Kristol took his advocacy a step further.

Did he ever. Which oughta be enough to send you off with a quickness to peruse the rest of it. Bottom line:

Unfortunately, there are still some conservatives who trust Kristol and the Standard fairly to report on the Trump presidency and Republican Congress. It’s important that the public fully understands what role Kristol and his publication played—and continue to play—in fueling the biggest political corruption scandal in American history.

Kristol asks a lot of questions on Twitter. It’s time for him to answer some now.

Meh, why bother? He’ll only lie about his key role in the most damning and damaging political scandal in American history. Hats off to Kelly anyway, for her truly great work in digging up this whole bait-shop’s worth of worms.

Share

Relentless

At what point do we draw a line under this and call it what it truly is: government-endrosed and -abetted harrassment and persecution of a member of a hated religion to deny his Contitutionally-protected (supposedly) right to freely practice and express his beliefs?

In June, the Supreme Court decided the case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, issuing a powerful rebuke to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for its “religious hostility” toward Christian baker Jack Phillips. Phillips had refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, and the commission had compared his decision to religious arguments in favor of the Ku Klux Klan and Nazism.

Now, the commission is again going after Phillips for declining to create a custom cake — this time a cake celebrating transgenderism. On Tuesday night, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Christian law firm that represented Phillips before the Supreme Court and helped him gain an important 7-2 victory, filed a federal lawsuit against the commission to forestall action against Phillips.

“The state of Colorado is ignoring the message of the U.S. Supreme Court by continuing to single out Jack for punishment and to exhibit hostility toward his religious beliefs,” ADF Senior Vice President of U.S. Legal Division Kristen Waggoner declared in a statement. “Even though Jack serves all customers and simply declines to create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events in violation of his deeply held beliefs, the government is intent on destroying him—something the Supreme Court has already told it not to do.”

On the very day the Supreme Court decided to hear Masterpiece Cakeshop (June 26, 2017), a caller asked the bakery to make a cake with a pink inside and a blue outside, celebrating a gender transition from male to female. The shop politely declined, but Phillips believes that the same lawyer, on other occasions, requested that he create other custom cakes with messages that violate his faith — a cake celebrating Satan and a cake with Satanic symbols. The lawyer, a man identifying as a woman, goes by the name Autumn Scardina.

Shortly after the Supreme Court gave Jack Phillips his win, denouncing the Colorado Civil Rights Commission for “religious hostility,” the state began to investigate Phillips again, finding probable cause that he had discriminated against the transgender lawyer who Phillips believes placed the call.

In other words, the horribly-misnomered Colorado “Civil Rights” Commission—a mangling of language so staggering in its grotesquerie as to shatter credulity—is nothing more than the exclusive plaything of a single obssessive psychotic freak.

That’s your tax dollars at work, Colorodans. Which means that now, it’s your move.

To forestall a second round of litigation, ADF filed suit against the commission in federal court. Jeremy Tedesco, ADF’s senior counsel and vice president of U.S. Advocacy and Administration, told PJ Media his firm would “preemptively file a lawsuit in federal court to try to stop what the commission is doing.”

“We think the circumstances are uniquely aligned to do that,” Tedesco explained.

All well and good, I guess. But it couldn’t be more clear at this point that when it comes to getting these odious fascists off our backs and out of our lives, the only thing that’s ever going to do the trick is to start killing them in job lots. At the very least, this Autumn Scardina creature in particular should be doxxed, terrorized, robbed of his/her/its livelihood, surrounded by screaming, fist-waving protesters every minute of his/her/its day, and generally hounded until he/she/it breaks down into a blubbering, trembling pile of disagreggated protoplasm.

And in case anybody out there persists in making the mistake of thinking this is about cakes in any way, shape or form:

While the commission — and some liberal Supreme Court justices — argued that Phillips had discriminated against the same-sex couple in 2012 based on their sexual orientation, he constantly argued that he merely wished to opt out of creating a cake to celebrate an event he did not consider a true wedding. This was not the first time Phillips had turned town such cake orders, either. He has always refused to bake any Halloween-themed cakes, which are consistently in demand every October.

Furthermore, when Craig and Mullins requested their cake, Phillips offered to sell them anything else in the store, but they refused. Phillips was not engaging in discrimination against them — he was refusing to bake a cake that would convey a message he disagreed with.

Ironically, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission actually defended another baker who refused to bake a cake that would convey a message. In 2015, the commission declined to take up an appeal involving Azucar Bakery, which refused to bake Bible-shaped cakes with messages against homosexuality. The bakery’s owner, Marjorie Silva, said she refused to bake the cakes because the writing and imagery were “hateful and offensive.”

The very same commission that defended Silva’s free speech rights trampled on Phillips’ free speech rights. This was one major reason why the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Phillips. (The Court was also persuaded by the commission’s outrageously offensive comparison between Phillips’ religious refusal to bake the cake and a defense of Nazism, which was particularly egregious because Phillips’ father fought in World War II and liberated a concentration camp.)

If all the freak actually wanted was a goddamned cake to “celebrate” his/her/its dementia and depravity, he/she/it could have gone to who even knows how many other bakeries and gotten one easily enough, up to and including the above-mentioned Silva’s shop. No, this self-loathing abomination’s true goal is the suppression of the right to practice one’s religion freely and in peace. Bottom line:

“The most common misconception amongst people generally and people who care about religious freedom is that you can win a case and then walk away,” Tedesco, the ADF lawyer, explained. “We always tell our friends that our opposition doesn’t rest. I don’t think there’s any better example of that principle than this same commission taking up essentially the same case against the same man.”

“The Left and progressively-minded commissions like this will never rest,” Tedesco warned. “It’s just a matter of eternal vigilance.”

“If we tire out, if we become weary in defending these things, we will ultimately lose these freedoms for the next generation,” he added, ominously.

Taking this and every other God-given freedom away from those who desire only to be left alone is precisely the goal of Leftist swine, and they will never tire or relent in pursuit of it. They will rise from their own noxious ashes again and again and again, as many times as it takes, until they get what they want.

Repeat after me: they will not stop. They will have to BE stopped. Lawyers and lawsuits won’t do it. Angry op-eds won’t do it. Listening to Rush Limbaugh every day won’t do it. Voting certainly won’t do it. Nothing short of actual physical confrontation and violence will.

Well, so be it then. Kill ’em all. Let God sort ’em out. Try as I might, I can no longer see any way this restart of the long-stalled Darwinian-selection process doesn’t begin soon. As dismal as I once considered the prospect, I can no longer honestly say I give a damn. Let them reap what they’ve sown; may they have joy of their foolish, fascist choice.

Share

“They Are Not Never Trump – They Are Never You

Lots of folks still seem not to like the term, but for my money there’s never going to be an epithet that cuts more directly to the chase than: cuckservatives.

They hate you because you refuse to honor and respect them, to validate their cheesy status within the Beltway hierarchy, and to acknowledge them as your betters. Your pig-headed uppityness has disrupted their scam. The old paradigm, the model of go-along/get-along and feed the crackers out there in America articles about lib outrages to keep them writing checks, no longer cuts it. You’ve stripped them of their status by holding them accountable for their failure to fight for conservatism, and for us.

And it is such a pathetic status – maybe they are fighting so hard because the stakes are so low. For some, it’s a mention on the masthead of an anorexically thin magazine that now publishes only because some zillionaire keeps handing its boss wads of cash, the actual subscribers to the cruise-shilling brochure having abandoned ship after the seven hundredth “Trump Is Icky!” expose. For others, it’s the chance to be the nominal conservative voice on Morning Joe, ready to pretend that actual conservatives concur with the ideological stylings of the Mick Jagger of flaccid, self-indulgent momrock.

Then there are those lucky few who get the “Here, boy!” to come live inside the house, collared and lying at the feet of their masters by the fire. What’s horrifying is that this is their dream, their sad, sad dream. Take the current occupant of the non-David Brooks prissy poodle position at the New York Times, Bret Stephens. He eagerly accepted the iron discipline of his new job after his first column hinted that the weird weather religion of the ruling class – the one that demands you Normals sacrifice your money and your sovereignty for the sake of the elite’s virtue – might not be, you know, totally a thing. He thank-you-sir-may-I-have-anothered, learned to heel, and pleased his masters by coming out hard against the Second Amendment like a good boy. Having got a taste for biscuits, he is still seeking treats – and gets them – like when he praised the firing of Rosanne and then praised the non-firing of actual racist Sarah Jeong.

Hypocrisy, thy name is True Conservatism™.

Read the rest of it, wherein Schlichter scorches ’em good.

Update! Movement Conservatism=Kabuki Konservatism.

I’ve addressed the programmatic Left in my two most recent books, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace—a study of the eternal battle between good and evil, centered on the moral nihilism of the Frankfurt School of 20th-century Communist philosophers—and The Fiery Angel, a series of interlocking essays regarding some of the touchstones of Western art and culture, from the Greeks through the 20th century, and how they provide the antidote to the spiritual poison injected into Western veins by the Frankfurters and their fellow travelers in academe and now journalism.

Now, does everything from the Oresteia to Wagner’s Ring cycle form a coherent, intellectually and emotionally consistent “conservative” program, by which we can live our lives? Clearly not.  The great works of art are and must always be non-didactic. Politicized art is worthless; but art that has political resonance generally stands the test of time.

To my ears, then, the constant harping in some quarters on “movement” conservatism is reminiscent of everything I’ve ever heard from the Left, or experienced in East Germany and the old Soviet Union. I’m not suggesting that “true” conservatism involves replacing one (transient) set of “preenciples” with another one, albeit far older. Rather, my argument is that conservatism isn’t a movement at all. Nor should it be. Rather, it’s a simple acknowledgement of timeless verities and a willingness to defend them against malevolent faddishness masquerading as “progress,” whose object is the destruction of our culture and its replacement with… well, nothing.

In short, it’s a recognition of great cultural peril, and the willingness to do something about it.

And that we did, by rejecting the “movement” phonies in favor of an obstreporous outsider eager to step over the supine Repukes to duke it out with the Deep State swamp-dwellers toe to toe. Now, after Kid MAGA’s having landed some solid haymakers on the Left’s glass jaw, the shattered sissy-marys are flopping around on the canvas in conniptions, their manager belatedly trying to rig the fight by bribing the judges with a few “candid” pics of Nancy Pelosi in the shower. Meanwhile the GOPe Fauntleroys, having been roused from their slumber by heavy administration of buckets of ice water and smelling salts, wander around the arena trying to pick fights with members of the crowd, enraged over being heckled by them.

Share

The Tyranny Party

Tell me again all about how Trump’s the “authoritarian,” libtards.

One of the nice things about a core curriculum—sadly disappearing from most of higher education—is that it forces you to read books you would otherwise have skipped. Although this can be painful in the moment, it often pays off in unexpected ways.

Sigmund Freud is not a writer I would have picked up had he not been assigned. But I’m glad he was. The older I get, and the more of the Left I see, the more useful becomes Freud’s concept of “projection,” an unconscious defense mechanism that protects the ego from guilt or anxiety. It has amazing explanatory power and can help one make sense of a trove of recent books by left-wing writers, and one disgruntled former conservative, that blame Donald Trump for “authoritarianism” in American politics.

What, according to the authors reviewed here, is authoritarianism? They all attempt definitions, which are more or less similar. We may therefore take one as representative. The authoritarian, say Harvard government professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in How Democracies Die,

1) Rejects, in words or action, the democratic rules of the game,
2) denies the legitimacy of opponents,
3) tolerates or encourages violence, or
4) indicates a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents, including the media.

Gee, none of THAT sounds familiar at all, does it? Final analysis:

The most certain way a once-stable republic gives way to tyranny is when the republican spirit of its people is eliminated or undermined. All such regimes decisively depend for their success and longevity on a foundation of virtue in the people. How’s that going in our time? None of these books has anything at all to say about the family, the bedrock of representative republicanism. Only Mounk treats religion at any length, and then mainly to lambaste figures and societies to his right for being insufficiently deferential to Islam. Nor do these writers even mention the government-driven erosion of Alexis de Tocqueville’s “mediating institutions,” another bedrock of American democracy. All of these goods—and more—have been under persistent left-wing attack for at least two generations. The health of democracy seems not to have improved during that period. The connection seems obvious enough but these authors glide right past.

In any event, it’s rich to read the Left fret about the end of “democracy” when they have spent so much conscious effort undermining its necessary preconditions. They have done so, I think, for two reasons. First, they long ago came to equate liberty with license. Philosophically, once nature was discarded as the standard by which to guide and judge human life, the satisfaction of appetites became the only conceivable end. Hence in matters of personal morality, the contemporary Left is a curious combination of libertine and censor. Any physical—especially sexual or pharmaceutical—act that does not draw blood or pick a pocket is permitted. There are no mores that are simply necessary to society or to personal well-being. If you’re not directly harming someone else, then no one has any business even passing judgment on what you do. But you deserve to be crushed for thinking or saying the wrong thing—especially for passing judgment! Witness the recent massive freak-out over Penn Law professor Amy Wax’s praise of the once-commonplace concept of “bourgeois norms.” How dare she!

The second is that the Left has internalized, mostly without realizing it, the classical case that the only truly legitimate regime is the rule of the wise. For them, it comes dressed up in its modern guise as Hegelian historicism, but either way, it’s ironic that in today’s cisgender Euro-bashing fiesta, their whole political philosophy rests on two quintessentially dead white male arguments. But, hey—they believe they are the wise. Not those dumb rednecks. When the pieces start to fit together in your mind, you begin to realize why the modern Left wants to make America more like those South American countries with a pale upper class, a darker lower class—and no middle of any shade. Because they get to be in charge. Uppity low-income, middling-I.Q. whites are troublemakers. They think they deserve a say. Trump gives those nettlesome, red-hat-wearing proles a voice. What else do you need to know to grasp that Trump is bad?

The greatest factor in hastening the end of American-style democracy over the past 125 years (at least) has been increasing government centralization and administrative rule. To answer the question posed by Harvard Law professor Cass Sunstein’s edited volume: it already did happen here! The project all along has been, and still is, to end politics. That is, to foreclose as illegitimate public debate and disagreement on issues allegedly settled by science and administered via expertise. As our personal freedom to abuse our bodies, sate our appetites, and neglect our duties ever expands, our actual freedom to govern ourselves and determine our collective future radically contracts. The people writing these ostensible democratic laments are all in the intellectual lineage of those who brought us to this point. Their aim is to complete the project. Trump’s aim—however inchoate or implicit—is to reverse it. Who’s the real anti-democrat?

It’s Michael Anton, so there’s plenty more between my excerpt blocks, all of which you’ll want to read.

Share

Playing with matches

Little sparks can sometimes grow into huge conflagrations.

Since the election, the Left has been dreaming up scenarios in which the results of the election are overturned. For a long time they were sure Trump would be impeached, but that seems to have faded. Last year my left-wing office manager was deep into the impeachment scenarios. Now the talk is of revolution, which probably fits better with their conception of themselves as the heroic resistance. They imagine Trump as a strong man, against whom they must resist until the system cracks, and then the revolution begins.

On the other hand, there are limits to everything. As the outrages from the Left stack up, the average white person in American grows more angry. Talk to anyone sympathetic to this line of thinking and they will tell you they have grown far less tolerant of their remaining liberal friends. I know I’ve lost touch with quite a few former friends, because I will not tolerate their nonsense. I have friends who just a few years ago thought Ben Shapiro was edgy and now think the alt-right is too soft. There is a reaction brewing in the country.

The question is what would it take to move people from yelling at their televisions over the latest liberal outrage to marching in the streets. This is never easy to know. Sometimes, the smallest spark sets off the biggest fire. The reaction to Alex Jones getting purged from the internet has been surprising, given that he is not a serious person. I got questions from people, who never heard of him until yesterday, angry over his banishment. My guess is the percentage of people thinking fondly of Pinochet is at an all-time high right now.

As far as the spark, a move against Trump is good bet. The glue that keeps things from flying apart right now is middle-class white people, who still have faith in the political system. These are the middle American radicals Sam Francis wrote about 30 years ago during the Reagan moment. They will tolerate just about anything, as long as they think they can fight the other side within the system. An effort to remove Trump or even silence his advocates, could be a spark that gets these people into the streets.

It is tempting to think this will all blow over. I was in the camp until recently. Now, I just don’t see how it will ever be possible to make peace with the Left. They hate us and will use any means necessary. The lack of code is the critical part. How does one make peace with someone that will never abide by the rules? Whether this results in revolution, counter revolution or civil war is hard to know, but the number of people thinking the gap cannot be bridged is growing every day. Now we wait for the Cossak’s wink.

The gap CAN’T be bridged, as I’ve said for a long, long time now. The conflict is between people who want total, unquestioned control (“We have to regulate every aspect of people’s lives“) and people who insist on their right to be left alone—between people who believe in the Founding vision of limited government and people who want no limits on government whatsoever. How can anyone possibly imagine that those positions are reconcilable? As I’ve asked before: if you’d prefer to see Constitutional government reinstated yet also favor “compromise” with the Left, exactly which parts of the Constitution are you willing to see thrown out?

As for Alex Jones, I kinda don’t get the high dudgeon over his “deplatforming.” YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, et al have been doing the exact same thing to both strident Dissident Right types and far milder and more innocuous “conservatives” for a long while now without nearly this much ballyhoo over it. Now all of a sudden people are willing to draw a stark line around a nut like Jones? Not saying they shouldn’t, mind; if it had been done long ago, maybe we wouldn’t be where we are now. It just seems kind of weird to me that Alex Jones ends up being the Bridge Too Far, that’s all.

But it’s easy enough to explain. The Left has stayed frenziedly on the attack for so long now that people are fed up with them. Seeing as how they still show no sign at all of being willing to dial back on the cray-cray one little bit—on the contrary, they’re doubling down each and every day, seemingly incapable of perceiving the mainstream’s rapidly eroding forbearance not as the warning it is but as further incitement—it almost doesn’t matter WHO it was they went after this time.

And then the spark ignites the dry tinder, it blazes up and out of control, and everydamnedbody winds up getting burned.

Share

Culture war?

Nope. Call it culture vandalism, culture takeover, or…what this guy does, which is more apt than just about anything else.

Liberals, similar to but reputedly more reasonable than progs, always notice the single MAGA hat in a crowd but never the destructive prog behavior raging all around them. And it’s liberals who write the columns and tweets next day, dripping venom about the hateful normals. Yet any objective, disinterested observer would notice that it’s progressives who regularly run out of control in angry, violent spasms of incivility and ugliness.

This isn’t “culture war.”  Culture has nothing to do with it. It’s war on normality by Brownshirts, incited or paid for by the likes of George Soros and Tom Steyer. It has now graduated from street-fighting to trying to take down the U.S. government.

I will never understand these people’s hatred of America. They are unreachable by reason. 

Nobody should be squandering any effort on the attempt. As I keep saying: it wastes your time, and annoys the pig.

Get woke update! Schlichter gets down to the nut-cuttin’:

Some of you need to cease the denial and accept the harsh reality that the left hates you. It’s a fact, as much as the liberal gaslight gang and the conserva-sissy weakhearts deny it. You can tell that leftists hate you by the way that leftists tell you that they hate you.

Leftists don’t get to pull this garbage and just get away with it. Cut the nonsense about “outrage mobs.” Regardless of the principles of True Conservatism™, it’s perfectly okay under actual conservative principles to protest the liberal elite’s public embrace of outright race-based hatred. Hell, it’s mandatory. And this imbroglio is a perfect weapon for us, because it perfectly encapsulates our enemy’s hateful view of us in a way every midterm voter between the coasts is going to understand. We need to wield it like a sledgehammer in anticipation of the upcoming election.

You soft boys can pivot back to your “We’re better than that” pose and go AWOL, again, like you always do. But I say the Sarah Jeong/NYT love affair is a suppository, and I say we start curing the hemorrhoid that is liberalism by giving the left a double dose good and hard right up the progressive tract.

We need to accept the harsh reality that a substantial number of our fellow citizens hate our guts. All the simpering blabber about civility, all the clichés about unity, are all just comforting lies. A bunch of them hate us. They hate us. Hate. And we need to stop pretending the truth right in front of us is not right in front of us.

What do we do? We fight. This is not going to be a single skirmish. This is a campaign, a long and difficult one with the objective of destroying the ideological cancer metastasizing through America’s body politic. Step One: We must ruthlessly attack any manifestation of their hate using all the political and cultural tools at our disposal. We need to make liberal racism painful, so they are incentivized to abandon it. We’re not here to win moral victories. We’re here to win victory victories.

He has suggestions for actions that need taking in the right-now so as to be prepared for all the ugly eventualities, and he’s right about all of it.

Settling things update! Francis mulls it over:

I shall say this: ordinary private citizens are now being hunted and attacked by other private citizens for differing with them politically. Members of the latter group call their targets “Nazis” and attack them physically when they believe they can get away with it. A recent case of this has caused me to wonder, like the author of the linked piece, when actual fatalities will occur.

There have been cases, earlier in American history, of violence over political disputes. We fought a rather large war over one such dispute. It says something about such conflicts that the Civil War did not resolve the question it was fought over, namely whether the states remain sovereign: i.e., whether a state has the right to withdraw from the United States as defined by its Constitution.

It’s untrue that “violence never settles anything.” But it’s appallingly true that violence cannot settle any abstract question. It certainly can’t settle a question over rights.

Probably not. But it would settle the question of how long Normals will allow themselves to be used as punching bags for the Violent Left quite nicely. And it’s looking more and more as if it’s the ONLY way the problem of ever-escalating Lefty violence will be resolved.

Share

“Some racism is more equal than others”

Hound the NYT, harrass them, don’t let up for a moment. It’s doubtful that we’ll ever persuade them to give up their new house racist; she’s nothing more than a reflection of the views they already hold themselves, and we have no sway with them whatsoever. But we can at least make their—and her—lives miserable for a while, and that ain’t nothing.

As CNN’s Jim Acosta grandstanded his way out of a White House press briefing on Thursday because the administration portrays the news media in an adversarial light that he claims endangers journalists, the Times hired a woman who equates Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Why, other than to inspire an Operation Valkyrie, does anyone with a megaphone compare the elected president of the United States with a genocidal monster? Acosta advocates producing chants, buttons, and bumper stickers protesting the White House, apparently in an effort to persuade the public that the president is wrong to regard the press as an enemy.

Some people miss their irony.

More than a generation ago, The Media Elite reported a survey of 240 journalists at major publications showing that in the four presidential elections from 1964 to 1976 the press never voted by less than a 4-to-1 margin for the Democratic candidate. A 2014 study by Indiana University professors Lars Willnat and David Weaver indicated that the number of Republicans among full-time journalists dropped from 18 percent in 2002 to seven percent in 2013. Anecdotal evidence, such as the New York Times editorial board hiring a crackpot and CNN assigning a zealot to cover the White House, suggests that the media became more ideologically homogenous in the intervening few years.

Hypocrisy may color the media’s crusades for diversity in other fields as journalism remains a stuff-white-people-like profession. Something far worse characterizes its lockstep conformity of opinion.

Something far worse still characterizes their frantic lust to enforce that conformity of opinion on everyone else at the point of the Big Government gun.

Share

Still the same

Who gives a shit?

Since April, 1992, an international peacekeeping or monitoring force of some type has attempted to reduce the mayhem in war-wracked Somalia. Subtract 1992 from 2018: you get 26 years.

Prepare to add more. This week the UN Security Council voted to maintain the UN and African Union Somali peacekeeping operation (African Union Mission in Somalia, AMISOM) through at least 2020.

Troops from Kenya, Uganda, Burundi, Djibouti and Ethiopia man AMISOM and do the brunt of the fighting and security work in southern Somalia. AMISOM soldiers battle Al Shabaab Islamist terrorists, protect the national government in Mogadishu, the capital, and attempt to separate warring Somali clans.

Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti have immediate security interests in Somalia. Al Shabaab has struck Uganda with several terrible terror attacks. It makes sense their troops serve with AMISOM.

American special operations forces also conduct raids, drone attacks and surveillance missions against Al Shabaab.

Why are Americans involved? Al Shabaab has ties to al-Qaida and the Islamic State. In 2006, the group managed to seize Mogadishu. 2006 pre-dates the Islamic State but Al Shabaab envisioned establishing a militant terrorist state. To be succinct, Somalia in 2006, like Afghanistan in 2001, was an anarchic nowhere apocalyptic terrorists could use to launch global attacks.

So create a highly radioactive glass-lined crater where Somalia used to be and call the job done, then. Lather, rinse, repeat with Afghanistan and any other Muslim shithole that even looks like attacking us, until the mere thought of doing such makes them involuntarily wet themselves in terror.

Yeah, I know, ain’t gonna happen. But a fella can dream, can’t he? The truth is, Somalia ain’t worth the cost of a single Blackhawk helicopter, much less the lives of those American soldiers who died in Bill Fucking Clinton’s ill-advised, bumbling, pointless, and costly UN-mandated clusterfuck there. The idea of involving ourselves there again to any more complicated or risky degree than simply nuking the site from orbit makes me very nearly ill with disgust. Somalia is their shithole; they made it what it is. So let them fix it, then…or not, as they may prefer. Whatever.

Share

One step closer

Guess all my “careful what you wish for, libs” warnings are falling on deaf ears.

A new undercover video from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas features Antifa “fight instructors” teaching activists how to incapacitate political enemies by violently attacking them.

“If you get a good liver or kidney shot, it’s pretty much crippling them,” the Antifa instructor said. “They’re going to be pretty much doubled over and in a lot of pain.”

The instructor also recommended breaking one of the floating ribs to cause maximum pain on a victim. “It’s hard to move after that — to catch a breath,” he added helpfully. He told the activists that once the target is incapacitated, they can either run away or “really put a beating on them” if they want to “make it personal.”

The instructor said if they don’t knock the victim out, they should punch him in the nose or poke him in the eyes.

Well, okay, there’s that. Then there’s this.

“Why do you think you need a gun?”

It’s a question I suspect we all get asked at one time or another. We often answer that we carry for our protection, to defend ourselves or others. Others reply with a snarky, “It’s not called the ‘Bill of Needs,’ now is it?” Neither person is wrong, nor are many of the other thousands of potential answers.

However, it seems that some in Antifa are telling protestors looking to counter a right-leaning rally in Portland to “bring their own guns.”

I’m not about to tell those who are going to demonstrate peacefully to leave their guns at home, either. While I don’t want to see shootings take place, I want to see innocent people injured or killed even less. All people have a right to defend themselves, and that doesn’t change because of circumstances.

If anyone should leave their guns at home, it’s the group known to start fights over ideological differences, namely Antifa.

The Proud Boys would be no more than smart to arm up, knowing as they must that they’re attempting free speech in the no-free-speech zone of Leftardia, Oregon. As such, they can expect to be hounded, harrassed, and physically assaulted, with no support or protection of any kind from law “enforcement,” who will assuredly look the other way as rally-goers are encircled and viciously beaten by large groups of masked cowards.

People on our side tend to bluster a bit about Civil War 2.0, asserting that the Left needs to be careful about pushing us too far lest they get their heads handed to them with a quickness. I’ve done it plenty myself, in fact, and am still inclined to think it so. But it might also be that such talk is closely akin to that preceding CW 1.0, when both sides assumed that one good, hard skirmish would settle the issue, with all the air rushing out of the other side’s will to fight following a solid demonstration of serious intent. Once the balloon went up for real, the one side would realize that the other was serious, stack arms, and go home.

It didn’t work out that way at all, of course; the most notable thing about the first Civil War was its bloody ferocity, the willingness of rank and file farmboys, shopkeepers, and factory hands to stand firm and slaughter each other at close quarters until none were left upright—very nearly literally—again and again, over the course of years.

Against all previous expectation, the Southern soldiers in particular fought on well past the point of no hope—exhausted, outnumbered, clothed in rags, shoeless, half-starved, weary, far from home, with rocks and clubs when their ammunition ran out. Very few of them owned slaves, or knew someone who did. A fair number of my own ancestors fought for the Confederacy, and not one of them had so much as a pot to piss in, as they used to say. Slavery was an issue far, far removed from them, with little relevence. Yet they fought anyway, doggedly and without thought of surrender.

Might it not turn out the same today? How seriously does the Left take its openly-declared assessment of us as evil, murderous, bigoted, Nazi despots out to do grievous harm to all within our greedy grasp? Can people who don’t even understand what socialism is be deluded enough to lay down their lives to defend it anyway?

All signs point to yes. On the other hand, though…

FreakFags.jpg

I dunno, I gotta say I like Team Patriot’s chances here.

Share

On the necessity of PWNING the libs

That last post reminded me to check in on Schlichter in his regular spot.

You must have a heart of stone not to giggle in delight as you watch them howl with outrage while you crank them over the flames on the Twitter rotisserie.

But owning the libs is more than just delightful. It is absolutely necessary. Why? Morale – that intangible factor, combined with fearless leadership, that means the difference between total defeat and unexpected, legendary victory: Little Round Top, Rourke’s Drift, and yeah, the upcoming midterms.

Owning the libs is a rejection of their dominance and an assertion of our own. It is a way of not only saying, “We will not submit,” but of demonstrating that refusal to others. There is a reason the motto of the infantry is “Follow me,” and not “Uh, you guys go on ahead.”

People are not led to triumph by cowards, by wimps, or by submissive weasels who take heaps of garbage and then explain away their refusal to hit back by sobbing, “We’re better than that!”

People are not better than that. They want to fight back, but for that they must have morale, and morale requires that they need to see others fight back too. And when they don’t, morale collapses, there is a rout, and the bad guys win.

Let’s be clear about who the bad guys are, because in this struggle there are good guys (us) and there are bad guys. The bad guys are the people who outright tell us that they hope to strip away our freedom of speech. They tell us they want to circumscribe our religious practices to the point at which – maybe, if we’re good little boys and girls and non-binary beings – they might let us quietly practice our faith out of sight, maybe. They are the ones who call for us to be disarmed, then also call for us to be exiled from society, hounded, battered, and even murdered. My novels People’s Republic and Indian Country paint a picture of the hellscape they want to create.

Anyone who presumes to lead us and does not believe that we are in the right, that we are the good guys, is unfit to lead us. The bottom line is that we need to defeat the other side, and you don’t do that through moral equivalence, passivity, and submission. Non-owning is a non-starter.

Y’know, now and then I just have to sit back and marvel at how guys like Kurt manage to just keep on crankin’ out good stuff like this day after day, week after week, year after year. It’s remarkable, is what it is.

Share

“Sick, twisted racism”

They’re not even bothering to try to hide their hate anymore.

On Wednesday, the New York Times hired Sarah Jeong to join their editorial board. Shortly thereafter, Jeong’s old racist tweets emerged.

The tweets aren’t exactly ancient history. In 2014 and 2015, Jeong — senior writer at the Verge — unleashed a few Twitter tirades against people with a lighter complexion. She seems to have deleted them now, but screenshots showing the tweets (and her new Twitter bio as “soon to be editorial board @nytimes”) have surfaced on the Internet.

“Dumba** f**king white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs p**sing on fire hydrants,” Jeong tweeted in November 2014. Ouch! Not only a profanity-laced tirade, but a tirade comparing people to dogs because of the color of their skin!

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins,” she wondered in December 2014. Make no mistake, she suggested a whole race of people were unfit for above ground habitation due to the color of their skin.

In July 2014, Jeong admitted to taking a sick pleasure from being cruel to people based on the color of their skin. “It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” she confided. This confession did not specify what Jeong did to men based on their age and the color of their skin, but she did admit taking pleasure in cruelty.

Yeah, well, in the unlikely event she ever tries something “cruel” on THIS old white man, what she’ll wind up getting isn’t going to give her any pleasure at all.

The NYT, naturally, issued a quite lame defense of their brand-spanking new hire which, who cares.

Anybody out there still feeling good about our chances of being able to live peaceably cheek-by-jowl with “people” like this? If so, could you maybe explain to me just how you figger it?

I swiped my title from a Schlichter tweet posted by Insty:



I dunno, Kurt. Trump should mention it, sure. In fact, he should wave it like a bloody flag in LibMedia’s face every time they go all ragged and weepy about A) their self-asserted integrity and lack of “bias”; B) the environment of “danger” welling up in response to their open contempt for us; C) the very idea that the “news” they present might be of the “fake” variety. But honestly, I don’t see anybody being able to make them defend anything at all; at this point, they quite obviously no longer care who sees how overflowing with insane hatred they are.

Share

Piling on

Even Klavan—no Trump guy, he—can’t resist batting the squeaky little cat toy around a bit.

New York Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger says he told Trump his anti-press rhetoric could lead to violence. But the media’s anti-Trump rhetoric already has led to violence: public officials rat-packed and bullied, Trump supporters harassed, White House spokes-lady Sarah Sanders having to live under guard. And yet when Sanders pointed this out to Look-At-Me-I’m-Jim Acosta, Acosta stormed out of the room. Hell, if he doesn’t want to hear the truth, he could just stay home and watch CNN.

What’s also appalling is that reporters answered Sanders by reminding her of the tragic shooting of journalists in Maryland. But that had nothing to do with Trump. It was the personal grudge of a madman. Even when these knuckleheads are protesting being called Fake News, they are purveying Fake News. Remarkable.

But most remarkable is this: the media seems to take no responsibility for the anger in the country. Not once — not one time — have I seen a reporter come onscreen and say, “Hey, you know what, maybe we are biased. Maybe we haven’t listened. Maybe we have been arrogant and insulting. Maybe we do bear some responsibility for the anger against us.”

When Muslim extremists destroyed the World Trade Center, David Letterman and others among the chattering classes went on TV and wondered: “Why do they hate us?” But they can’t take the time to ask the same question about their fellow citizens. The Islamists are murdering pigs. Who cares why they hate us? These Trump supporters are just ordinary folks. If they were screaming at me, I’d do a moral inventory on myself before blaming them.

Yeah, but see, you have at least a modicum of good sense and humility, Andrew. Which makes for a pretty stark contrast with those shitbirds.

Update! Walsh also puts the boot in:

The old journalistic ladder looked something like this: a year or so on the police beat in Dubuque, followed by a stint covering the local county and perhaps federal courts for a newspaper in Portland, and then, if the reporter was able enough, a job on one of the big-city papers in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles. Not every piece had to have a political angle; not every lede needed to include a slighting reference to the president of the United States; not every opening graf needed to mischaracterize or refute the Republican/conservative position on any given topic. In fact, attitudinizing was strictly forbidden: it was talent that mattered, not the correct opinions.

Now the White House beat has become an entry-level reporting job, in the course of which the callowest of youths, or the most airheaded among the former beauty queens, can sass the objects of their coverage, mock them, call them liars, and generally act out in public. (Yes, Jim Acosta, we’re talking about you.)

This constant irruption of mindless prattle might be amusing were it not such a terrible commentary on the state of “journalism” today. And when the tables are turned, and the public gives the reporters a taste of their own crude hostility, the media freaks out and, of course, blames Trump, falsely claiming that a little civilian pushback against a group of people who openly despise them is somehow a direct threat to the First Amendment and might even get some reporters killed. The fact that, as far as I know, there has never been a single pampered White House correspondent killed in the line of duty, not only never seems to pierce the veil of their heroic fantasies, but it also dishonors the many great reporters who actually did die for their profession, among them Mark Kellogg (who died at the Little Bighorn with Custer) and Ernie Pyle, killed at Okinawa in 1945.

There’s precious little they don’t dishonor.

Updated update! OHH, talk about piling on!


Acosta-Thompson.jpg

Courtesy of WRSA.

Share

Acosta doubles down

And steps in it again.


The truth IS prevailing, Jimmy boy. That’s what’s happening right now…and it’s driven your side right into daylight barking madness.

Pro tip: you and your faux-journalist ilk aren’t supposed to even HAVE a side, Jimbo. But you do, and we all know you do. Hannity gets the last word:


Bang fucking ZOOM.

(Via Breitbart)

Share

“Journalists and their hangers-on are doing more to encourage violence against journalists than Trump is”



And then another libmedia drooltard chimed in to support his fellow propagandist:

In a now-deleted tweet, Caputo commented on the video, saying, “If you put everyone’s mouths together in this video, you’d get a full set of teeth.”

In another deleted tweet, he responded to a tweet castigating his mockery of Trump supporters. “Oh no! I made fun of garbage people jeering at another person as they falsely accused him of lying and flipped him off. Someone fetch a fainting couch,” Caputo wrote.

“Oh no! Some real Americans called Acosta out to his face for his open contempt of them, his and his network’s dishonest fake-news “journalistic” malpractice, and his general asswipery—verbally, without resorting to actual violence like liberals do. Someone fetch him a fresh clean diaper!”

Right back atcha, asshole.

Caputo then apologized for his insulting outburst, which, who cares. Insty offers thoughts:

Two points: (1) Yes, this is what the press thinks about Trump supporters, and this now-deleted tweet was an honest reflection of that. It’s totally hypocritical for people like Acosta to clutch their pearls about Trump’s “rhetoric” given how they treat, and talk about, his supporters. And as for their fear that Trump’s “rhetoric” might lead to violence, note how they skip right over the fact that Democrat James Hodgkinson shot GOP Congressman Steve Scalise as he tried to massacre the Republican House leadership.

(2) What’s worse is, Caputo’s actually one of the better political reporters, willing to report stuff that hurts Democrats and helps Republicans without sweeping it under the rug. That’s good, but if he thinks this way, what are the rest like?

And yes, he offered a solid apology. But that doesn’t change the attitude that his original statement revealed, or the fact that it seems to be widely shared among his press colleagues.

Fuck Caputo, fuck Acosta, fuck the whole filthy lot of them. The loathing and contempt for normal Americans their ilk can’t seem to help themselves expressing is reciprocated in full measure out here. Whining and bleating about “hate” and “violence” coming from these oozing chancres is pretty rich considering their own ongoing incitement to violence—incitement which has resulted in actual, y’know, hate and violence.

538, motherfuckers. That ain’t some prissy journo-dink’s fear or fantasy; that’s an actual, hard number of verifiable media applause for acts of shitlib violence against their opposition. In one corner, we have that; in the other, we have people making Wee Jimmy Winky wet himself by yelling “CNN sucks” in his pinched little face.

One of these things is NOT like the other.

“The press is not the enemy”? Like bleeding hell it ain’t. These guys are just upset that now we know it, and they’re shit-scared of the possibility of getting some of their own splashed back on them at last.

Well, cry me a river, you lying pissant pricks. This is just the opening bell; you sniveling curs have got a lot more like it and worse coming, and you’ve earned everything you might get, plus some.

Share

Guilty of being white

They hate you. They really, really hate you.

The Democratic coalition is always on the verge of flying apart in fratricidal enmity. At the moment, for example, the media is stoking black rage toward white women, whom The New York Times is repeatedly calling by the racist slur “Becky,” for summoning the police when they feel unsafe.

The one thing the Democrats’ confederacy of the dissimilar can share is hatred of whites, or, to be precise, cisgender straight white men.

This is why the press keeps pushing endless hate hoaxes. Shameful antiwhite racist libels are the KKKrazy Glue that holds together the Democratic coalition.

To Vox readers, importing a new electorate of foreign ringers is how they intend to grind their enemies, their fellow American citizens, into the dust beneath their political chariot wheels, so it’s best not to notice what they’ve chosen to inflict upon their nation.

After all, that white Americans are slowly waking up to the fact that they don’t really want to get pushed around by newcomers just for being white merely proves that whites deserve their fate.

Klein eventually seems to endorse the stratagem offered by his favorite researcher, Jennifer Richeson: The media should lie harder to white people.

Richeson believes it would be wise for demographers to stop using terms like “majority-minority America”—after all, whites will still be a plurality, and what good can come of framing America’s trajectory in a way that leaves the single largest group feeling maximally threatened? It sounds like “a force of nonwhite people who are coming and they are working as a coalition to overturn white people and whiteness,” Richeson said, laughing. “That’s a problem!”

But for the Democrats, of course, that’s not a problem; that’s the plan.

My post title up there is swiped from an old Minor Threat song:

I’m sorry
For something that I didn’t do
Lynched somebody
But I don’t know who
You blame me for slavery
A hundred years before I was born


DAMN, but I still love that band. Anyways, and along these same lines, Thales names his Idiot Of The Week:

Self-loathing white people are some of the most disturbing people to have ever drawn breath. Drama queens might be the best way to describe them, for they obsess endlessly about things they haven’t done, they elevate petty problems to the world stage and bury major ones behind a veneer of political correctness. A white kid wearing dreadlocks is the end of the world. But recognizing that ISIS lobs gay people off of buildings for amusement is probably racism (even though, paradoxically, Islam is not a race). Sanctimony is their religion, Social Justice their crusade, and endless self-hatred their spiritual diet.

Here’s a window into the insane mind of one of these cretins: White People Have No Culture. And it cries out in the darkness of colossal ignorance for a proper fisking.

For a moment, I almost felt sorry for the author. While I generally feel quite secure in the knowledge of where I come from, who I am, and the history and culture of my ancestors, she clearly does not feel this. I could discuss this topic for hours. Today’s modern urbanite “cosmopolitans” have only the most superficial understanding of culture and history. The author knows that her knowledge of “indigenous” culture and history is woefully lacking, but she doesn’t stop to consider the possibility that her understanding of European cultures and history is similarly lacking. Imagine standing beneath the Hagia Sophia and saying “white people have no culture.” Imagine walking into the Pantheon in Rome and suggesting that white people have no understanding of their history.

Powerful stuff, as is his closer.

Share

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on

Isn’t it just AWFUL how Trump keeps harping on and on about “fake news”? Why, the man isn’t merely a jerk; he’s a menace. Here all these dedicated journalists work hard to present facts in an unbiased way, and then Trump endangers these dedicated professionals by creating this climate of hatred for no good…that is, with absolutely no basis in…ummm…uhhhh….

Dang.

One year later, National Geographic has finally admitted to facilitating “fake news” regarding climate change. The magazine’s most viral video ever, which featured heart-wrenching images of a starving polar bear, perpetuated the narrative that the animal’s imminent death was caused by climate change. However, the climate change aspect of the story is void of any real evidence.

“We had lost control of the narrative,” admitted Cristina Mittermeier, the photographer of the polar bear. Mittermeier explained the climate change deception in a piece titled “Starving-Polar-Bear Photographer Recalls What Went Wrong” for the magazine’s August issue.

Mittermeier conceded that the images of the bony, emaciated polar bear were meant to sound an alarm about climate change, though she complains that people took the image “literally.”

“Photographer Paul Nicklen and I are on a mission to capture images that communicate the urgency of climate change. Documenting its effects on wildlife hasn’t been easy,” she wrote. “With this image, we thought we had found a way to help people imagine what the future of climate change might look like. We were, perhaps, naive. The picture went viral — and people took it literally.”

Perhaps people took the gloom-and-doom climate change narrative “literally” because Nat Geo’s first line of the video was, “This is what climate change looks like.” To boot, the words “climate change” were even emphasized, highlighted in the magazine’s signature yellow.

The “fake news” narrative was viewed by over 2.5 billion sets of eyes, becoming the magazine’s most viral video in their history.

“Perhaps we made a mistake in not telling the full story — that we were looking for a picture that foretold the future and that we didn’t know what had happened to this particular polar bear,” she wrote.

“Mistake” my hairy ass. You did precisely what you intended to do, what shitlib propagandists like you always do: lied to advance the Leftist agenda. As Prestigiacomo concludes: “It’s simply befuddling why there’s such a lack of trust in media.” Ain’t it, though. Ain’t it just.

Share

Jordan for Speaker

I’m down with it.

“Where is Congress?”

That is the refrain we hear from voters all over the country, and not just from conservatives. The courts and the bureaucracies are determining the outcome of every policy issue, and Congress, the strongest branch of government, is too wishy-washy to act. Jim Jordan actually has a novel idea: Fulfil the actual campaign promises made to the American people.

What ever happened to plugging the leaky borders? What ever happened to defunding sanctuary cities? What ever happened to fixing health care? What ever happened to cutting spending? Why is Planned Parenthood still funded? Why is Obama’s amnesty still in place?
In each of these areas, to the extent that Congress has ever addressed the issues, it makes them worse. It has sought to codify amnesty, it has busted the budget, it has done away with the debt ceiling, and it has accepted the core premise of Obamacare. It has grown almost every agency Trump promised to cut.

Why? Because leaders of both parties fundamentally share the same philosophy – to grow government, to empower private monopolies in health care backed by government, and to cater to open-borders interests, while putting Americans last instead of first in sovereignty, national security, and foreign policy.

The House of Representatives is the most powerful body of government in the sense that it’s closest to the people and is fully controlled by a simple majority. Republicans have controlled this body for 20 of the past 24 years, but what has it gotten us? They hold the power of the purse with a simple majority and can wield the most influence over the budget. After all, all revenue increases must begin in the House. Yet our sovereignty is going to hell in a handbasket, the courts control everything, interest on the debt will surpass military spending, and Congress has essentially ceded health care and military policy to the executive branch.

For far too long, Republicans have had leadership that fundamentally accepts the policy premises, priorities, and messaging of the status quo Swamp. To that end, leaders only bring up nanny-state fiscal bills and open-borders initiatives, but won’t allow any number of good, innovative conservative ideas to come to the floor. The only thing they are willing to do is cut taxes, and they plan on using the tax issue every year as political morphine to mask the pain of every other policy betrayal.

That’s not because they’re hapless, inept, or cowardly, as some still insist; they’re Ruling Class frauds, actively on the other side. Who knows if Jordan could or would do any better. It’s for dead sure he couldn’t do any worse.

Share

Draft horses of America, unite!

You have nothing to lose but your harness…and a passel of whining, over-entitled parasites who don’t know their asses from an inner tube with wrinkles painted on it.

Congratulations, oh most insufferable of generations – against all odds and confounding the experts, you have still somehow managed to make yourselves even more annoying. Apparently, the hep new jive among your tiresome cohort is “Democratic Socialism,” resurrecting a poisonous nineteenth-century political death cult and putting a kicky new spin on it to make it palatable for the suckers. It’s the political equivalent of hipsters who insist vinyl records are superior because they didn’t grow up forced to crank their tunes on that miserable format.

The “Democratic” part is some cunning rebranding. Just stick “Democratic” in front of something awful and it’s good-to-go. “Democratic haggis”? Yummy! “Democratic herpes”? Sexy! “Democratic Nazism?” Hey, what’s the difference? National socialism, democratic socialism? It’s really just a question of who runs the camps because regardless of the particular brand of socialism, there are always camps.

Always.

No one loves socialism quite like a moron who has never experienced it firsthand. No one hates it like someone who has seen it up close. I walked around in its ruins overseas; it’s an abattoir. My wife escaped it, though her granddad didn’t – he rotted in Castro’s prisons for nearly two decades because he refused to play ball with the reds. Then he died. Oh well, gotta break a few eggs to create a paradise where somebody else pays for your college, right?

Just remember that you are an egg.

Kurt throws some very choice words at bug-eyed Mental Giant and Future Of The Democrat Socialist Party Miranda Veracruz de la Jolla Cardinale Occasional-Cortex, too. But did he say “moron” just now? Why yes, I do believe he did. And as sterling an example as she is, the word doesn’t apply only to her, either.

Democrats are less likely to know what socialism is compared to other voters but have a much more favorable opinion of it. They stop well short, however, of thinking the Democratic Party should become a national socialist party.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 28% of all Likely U.S. Voters think the national Democratic party should officially declare itself a socialist party. Fifty-three percent (53%) disagree, while 18% are undecided.

Still, 51% of Democrats have a favorable impression of socialism, with 13% who share a Very Favorable one. This compares to favorables of 21% among GOP voters and 26% among unaffiliateds, with seven percent (7%) and five percent (5%) respectively who hold a Very Favorable opinion of it.

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of Democrats, however, incorrectly believe the individual has more power than the government in a socialist system, a view held by just 12% of Republicans and seventeen percent (17%) of unaffiliated voters.

Never forget, folks, they’re smarterer than you. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em.

Those under 40 have a much more favorable opinion of socialism than their elders do and are the strongest supporters of Democrats becoming a national socialist party. But younger voters are also the most likely to believe the individual has more power under a socialist system.

Liberals like socialism a lot more than moderates and conservatives do and are much more likely to think it empowers the individual. But conservatives are the biggest fans of Democrats becoming a socialist party.

Actually, that isn’t quite right: I don’t think any of us is particularly happy that that’s what they in fact have become. What we’re in favor of is them owning up to the sad fact at last. But then, socialists ain’t exactly known for their honesty, as Schlichter reminds us:

Socialism’s perfect record of failure, misery, and slaughter is kind of a problem for them, so they pivot and distract, playing an ideological shell game by claiming that what they really want isn’t socialism. Why, they just want to be more like Canada! This, of course, begs the question of why they call themselves “socialists” if they don’t want socialism. But Normals are woke; they prefer their freedom and abundant toilet paper. They know that the current socialist fad is a lie, because socialism is built on lies. The democratic socialists keep promising Denmark and Norway, but they always deliver Cuba and Venezuela.

Of course, as I’ve noted here before myself, Norway isn’t really quite as socialist as all that, and other Scandinavian countries are beginning to back rapidly away from the Great Third-Way Experiment that has impoverished them. But socialism aside, ideology aside, honestly representing who and what they are is what the Democrat-Socialist criminal conspiracy masquerading as a political party ought to be forced to try to win elections on:

But let’s look at this. Forget ideology for a second and let’s just look at some readily available facts. We have just come off eight years of economic stagnation. No economic growth to speak of. We have had tax increases out the wazoo in the past eight years, including all of the new taxes brought on by the government taking over health care with Obamacare. We had the president of the United States, Barack Obama, running around to places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Ohio and telling people out of work:

(impression) “It’s too bad, but your jobs are never coming back — and if someone tells you that your job will be coming back, he’s waving a magic wand, but what’s he gonna do? What’s Trump gonna do? Just wave a magic wand? You gotta get ready for the fact those jobs are not coming back.” So rather than have a president that inspired people, we have a president who tried to convince them that this was the new America: A nation in decline. We didn’t really deserve our robust past, and we needed brilliant people like him to manage this decline so that resources — which would be dwindling — could be distributed more fairly and equally to the population at large.

Okay. So we’ve come off eight years of that kind of thing, exactly what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to return to. In just a year and a half of a presidency that believes in American greatness, that believes lost jobs can be brought back — who believes that this economy can once again grow and that people’s incomes can increase, that standard of living and wealth can once again start going up. In just a year and a half it’s happened. Does this woman have the ability to look at facts on the ground? The government today…

Have you looked at the latest revenue that has been collected by taxes? It’s a record high. The government is collecting record tax revenue after Trump’s tax cuts! This also happens every time it’s tried. It’s simple math. More people are working than under Obama, and thus more people are paying taxes. So even per capita taxes may be down and the amount of money individuals are paying, it’s more than made up by all the new taxpayers that are happily working, whereas a year and a half ago they weren’t.

There are stories… I have a story in the Stack today that one of the big problems that employers have today is there just aren’t enough people to fill jobs that are open, and so employers are getting ready to scrub the idea that prior experience is necessary. They need work done! There’s more job openings than there are people to fill them right now. Now, where is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? She’s an economics graduate from Boston University. Does she have the slightest idea what’s going on now?

Of course not. She’s dumb as a box of hair; credentialed, but not educated; inarticulate, not bright, and entirely arrogant about all of it.

And she’s also the brightest star in the Democrat Socialist firmament at the moment—precisely as she should be. We all ought to fervently hope not only that she wins election, but that she remains in the spotlight as an avant garde leader of her trainwreck of a Party for as long as possible. Realistically, we can’t expect anything good from a NYC Congresscritter, but sending a dumpster fire like Occasional-Cortex to Mordor On The Potomac might work out even better anyway. The more she blibbers and stammers her arrant hard-Left horsepuckey, and the more Normals see her doing it, the better off we’re all going to be. She might just finish off the Democrat Socialist Party for good all by herself.

Share

LOSING!

So how’s it all working out for the Coup Cucks Clan, The Batshit Left, the Democrat Socialist ProPols, the Vichy GOPe, David French, and assorted other Ruling Class #NeverTrumpTards?

They’re all rooting for Trump to fail.

But a funny thing is happening. Even though everyone seems to hate Trump … they don’t. In the midst of all this hate, Trump’s popularity is expanding and exploding upward.

First, the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll came out last week. Trump’s approval is the highest of his presidency. Among members of his own party, it’s the second-highest in history. Trump beats Reagan, Obama, JFK and Bill Clinton among voters from their own party.

Then the Gallup poll came out. Same result. Trump’s highest approval ever.

Then the American Barometer poll by HarrisX came out. Same result. Trump’s highest approval ever.

All of these polls came out after the Helsinki Summit. After a nonstop media blitz about Michael Cohen’s tape recordings of Trump’s supposed misdeeds.

After images of children separated from mothers and critics comparing Trump’s border policy to a Nazi initiative. After pundits panned Trump’s Russia performance and called for impeachment.

In the aftermath of all that, the highest approval ever for Trump.

And only then did the great news come rolling in. Trump beat NATO. It capitulated and agreed to spend $33 billion more. Trump beat the European Union. It capitulated and agreed to concessions on soybeans, energy and tariffs. Trump beat North Korea. Kim Jong Un turned over the remains of 55 U.S. heroes missing since the Korean War.

Trump is on his way to a Nobel Peace Prize.

And then the best news of all: Gross domestic product growth is 4.1 percent, the fastest in years. The second-highest since 2003. The Trump economy is in overdrive. And we’re just getting started.

I’d dearly love to include Root’s heartwarming final ‘graphs in this excerpt too, and very nearly did. But what the hell, I gotta leave something for you guys to click over and read. Trust me, you’ll be glad you did.

Update! Certainties, walls, nooses, and fairy tales.

Trump-is-doomed stories are one of the media’s favorite fairy tales. Remember when you saw “Peter Pan” when you were 4 and you actually thought that clapping for Tinkerbell would bring her back to life? Pundits think that if they cheer loudly enough for Trump to get eighty-sixed, it’ll happen. His (first?) term in office is more than a third over, and the Very Serious Commentators have been ushering him out the door the entire time. Or at least they’ve been trying to. It turns out that Trump doesn’t pay a lot of attention to the usher-pundits.

Read all of this one too—and laugh, laugh, laugh, laugh.

Share

“Don’t call him Ishmael”

Moby Dick redux.

As far as fishing expeditions go, this one evokes one such adventure told 167 years ago — and still checked out of libraries today. “But shall this crazed old man be tamely suffered to drag a whole ship’s company down to doom with him?”

The president’s pursuers initially alleged collusion between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russians. They used a foreign spy in their attempts to prove foreign interference in the presidential campaign. The fact that the campaign of Trump’s opponent paid for this investigation — their use of intermediaries to do so a tacit admission of its deceitful purpose — did not persuade federal investigators to take the evidence amassed with a grain of salt. Instead, they agreed to further subsidize the foreigner’s efforts to prove that foreigners meddled in the presidential election and presented his evidence to a judge, bypassing the fact that partisan entities launched it as part of an opposition research effort, as, incredibly, coming from a “credible” source. One administration did this to spy on a campaign volunteer for the administration that succeeded it.

Trump’s pursuers continued to obfuscate. An inspector general and congressional oversight revealed investigators boasting “we’ll stop it” in reference to Trump’s election, a discussion of an “insurance” policy in the unlikely event of the despised candidate’s election, and an FBI lawyer texting “Viva le resistance” regarding his plans for acting as a fifth columnist in the incoming administration. Finding no evidence of collusion, Trump’s pursuers steamrolled over attorney-client privilege and raided the office of Trump’s personal lawyer. A 1990s apologist for the Clintons then released a conversation involving Trump and his attorney — surreptitiously recorded by the latter. It proved this shocking fact: a billionaire former casino magnate and beauty pageant overseer once slept with a really, really beautiful woman.

How did we get from Vladimir Putin to Karen McDougal?

“To produce a mighty book,” Herman Melville explains, “you must choose a mighty theme. No great and enduring volume can ever be written on the flea, though many there be who have tried it.” Robert Mueller, who couldn’t convict Hells Angels and tried to frame Steven Hatfill as a domestic terrorist, now tries to write a mighty book with Donald Trump as his Moby Dick. This one figures to end for Ahab the same way the first one did.

The investigation exposes the investigators more than the investigated. It reveals the umpires as partisan players. It demonstrates lawbreaking by law enforcers. It sows distrust in institutions heretofore beloved by the American people.

Beware of fishing expeditions. You might catch something; monomania more likely than Moby Dick. They tend to hook the fisherman more often than the fish. But the man attached to one end of the line never sees it that way.

Unfortunately for him, Mueller’s tome won’t wind up on any must-read list; it’s gonna sink just as surely as the Pequod did.

Share

Lesson: ignored

Wasn’t properly taught, nor driven home.

California Rep. Maxine Waters said that Americans should be “out in the streets screaming” about President Trump in a Wednesday interview.

Waters told CNBC’s John Harwood, “I think [Trump’s] dangerous.”

“I don’t know why people take it. I think Americans should be out in the streets screaming to the top of their voice. Do something. Make something happen,” she continued.

During the interview, she also said, “[Trump is] one of the most deplorable people I’ve ever encountered in my life.”

These comments come after Waters encouraged the harassment of Trump cabinet members in June.

Looks like the Oathkeepers, with their half-hearted, aborted “protest” at her office instead of her home, screwed the pooch sure enough. Malone again: “If you open the ball with these people you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they won’t give up the fight until one of you is dead.” And yes, it should be noted that in one case we’re talking about gangsters, crooks, and violent criminals, while in the other we’re talking about…Al Capone.

(Via Ace)

Share

The Deep State is real

An excellent synopsis of the “Russia collusion” hoax.

Under questioning, Comey admitted to the Inspector General Michael Horowitz that he authored the May 2 statement and penned every word of it himself. But then he offered the implausible claim that “he did not recall that his original draft used the term ‘gross negligence,’ and did not recall discussions about that issue.”

Comey’s amnesia is preposterous. He would have us believe that, as FBI director, he memorialized in print his decision that the leading candidate for president of the United States had committed crimes, yet later could not recollect anything about the most important decision of his career.

The truth is that Comey well remembers what he wrote, because he participated in subsequent discussions with top officials at the FBI about Clinton’s “gross negligence.” Several meetings were held on the subject and contemporaneous notes prove that Comey was in attendance. Those records show that although Comey was convinced that Clinton was “grossly negligent” in violation of the law, he was determined to clear her notwithstanding. To achieve this somersault and absolve the soon-to-be Democratic nominee, the legally damning terminology would have to be stricken from his statement. 

Amnesia must be contagious at the FBI. Testifying before Congress, Strzok feigned no recollection of using his computer to make the critical alteration that cleared Clinton. He did, however, directly implicate the FBI director.

“Ultimately, he (Comey) made the decision to change that wording,” said Strzok.

But wait, how could Comey order a change in the words he doesn’t remember writing?  Their stories don’t jibe. At least one of them is lying.

Read all of it. As confusing and convoluted as the coup attempt may seem at first blush, it’s actually quite cut and dried. To wit: our government is assuredly NOT what we’ve all been led to believe since childhood. Its shadowy, unaccountable agencies operate with neither the “consent of the governed” nor its subjects’ best interests in mind; the minions of those misbegotten agencies possess not honor nor integrity nor humility nor a sense of duty nor respect for American values, traditions, and institutions to any discernable degree.

Our government, in short, is an affront to all the Founders revered and intended. To insist, as Democrat-Socialist shitwads do when it’s politically convenient for them, that real Americans owe such rogue abominations as the FBI, CIA, IRS, and the whole diseased host of alphabet agencies even the smallest dollop of allegiance or reverence is a grotesque insult—one that ought to resound across the fruited plain continuously, until every last sewer-rat therein is forced to flee for their very lives from the environs of Mordor On The Potomac lest the righteous rage of an abused populace descend upon them in the measure they deserve.

Share

Civil War, then and now

One of these things will not be like the other.

Such gallantry seems unthinkable today, when members of the Trump administration are hounded from restaurants and theatres, and Confederate officers like John Lea, if they are remembered at all, are considered precursors of the German National Socialists, and their once famous and respected commanders like Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jeb Stuart have their statues toppled and banished from public squares, their names stripped from public schools, and their memories spat upon and disgraced.

The difference between the America of today and the America of what seems like just yesterday is that we once had a common culture. As recently as 1990, Ken Burns could make a Civil War documentary for PBS and let historian Shelby Foote wax eloquent on the martial prowess of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest —  something that now would likely get them both tarred, feathered, and Twitter-banned.

Yes, there were big differences between North and South a century and a half ago. The South was a slave-holding, free-trading, libertarian-leaning, conservative Christian, agricultural, aristocratic Sparta, while the North was a commercial, industrial, protectionist, Transcendentalist, social gospel, democratic Athens. But they held far more in common than separated them — beginning with the fact that, as Lincoln observed, “Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God.”

One need only compare the Confederate Constitution to the United States Constitution to see that the former bears a striking resemblance to the latter. And far from being a national socialist charter, the Confederate Constitution puts even more restraints on federal power and limits the president to one six-year term.

Thereby proving that the South wasn’t wrong about everything.

The great seal of the Confederacy bears the image of George Washington, many of whose relatives served with the Confederacy, including Lieutenant James B. Washington, a West Point classmate of Custer’s (the two had a famous picture taken together — Washington was a prisoner of war — a few weeks before Lea’s wedding).

North and South venerated the Founders. They shared the same language, the same religion, and, in large part, the same general stock. Most of all, they shared what Jeff Sessions was recently rebuked for calling an “Anglo-American heritage” of liberty under law, stretching from the mists of medieval England — even before Magna Carta — to our own Bill of Rights.

Today, however, our divisions are so deep and fundamental that Americans cannot even agree on what marriage is or what a man or a woman is (which is pretty darn fundamental).

The lunatic self-righteousness of the Left (and yes, I’m afraid one must point fingers here), where disagreement is bigotry to be prohibited by law or even condemned and prosecuted as treason, is a consuming, destructive fire that will not be easily quenched, and cannot be reached by cool waters of rational argument.

Crocker gamely—and yes, gallantly—offers a few suggestions for forestalling the coming conflagration. I wish I could say I still held out much hope for such a solution. But with every passing day yielding its outrageous insult to all decency from the Bughouse Left, each surpassing the last in vileness and provocation, that hope fades, to be replaced with the dismal realization that real tragedy is all but inevitable now.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix